4 ms·

> That sounds pretty decent, but the grouped by age/location/education level median The poster said "the majority of Americans", not "the majority of young Ame

> That sounds pretty decent, but the grouped by age/location/education level median The poster said "the majority of Americans", not "the majority of young Americans with less education" or something, so I talked about the median, explicitly acknowledging the presence of millions of people who are poor. > most people wouldn't and shouldn't have to sell their house or car to be able to afford a medical emergency If someone needs money from their house, they don't have to sell it. The median non-primary-residence net worth in the US is 40k. I still think it's silly to pretend $1500 is unthinkable for the majority of Americans like it is for the minority of people in America who are poorer than most others. > ( even though i agree that if you have a $120k net worth, you should be able to save money on the side, but i wouldn't be surprised if there are situations where that's hard ( e.g. house bought years ago, a household member without a job, friend/family/only remaining job are in the area)). Paying large bills is hard, especially with all the stuff life throws at you. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

jrochkind1 5y ago
> Just 39% of Americans could pay for a $1,000 emergency expense > * Fewer than 4 in 10 people have enough savings to pay for an unexpected $1,000 expense in cash. > * The rest would have to borrow, use a credit card or take out a personal loan. > * While the pandemic has set back emergency savings, many people are optimistic their finances will improve in 2021. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/just-39percent-of-americans-could-pay-for-a-1000-emergency-expense.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/just-39percent-of-americans-... But sure, many of those could take on debt to do it, as the summary says, true. Medical debt is a leading cause of bankruptcy in the US. (No, I'm not saying $1500 alone is going to cause a bankruptcy.)
- anchpop 5y ago
  The bankruptcy stat is that ~60% bankruptcies were contributed to by medical issues or debt. Here is the study it comes from: [0]. Many people misquote this as the bankruptcies having been caused by medical debt. For example, the 60% stat includes income loss due to illness (40% of bankruptcies involved this). Only for about 30% of bankruptcies did the debtor actually say medical bills were a reason for the bankruptcy. This is not to say the healthcare system in the US has no flaws. But it bothers me that a stat which found “loss of income due to illness” was more common among bankruptcies than medical bills greater than $5k or 10% of pretax income (~35%), constantly gets construed as “medical debt is responsible for 60% of bankruptcies” when debt doesn’t even appear to be the largest factor of medical-related bankruptcies. And this misconception is everywhere. This article [1] says “The same researchers' 2009 study claimed that 62.1% of all bankruptcies were caused by medical bills.” and was the top result on google when I searched “bankruptcies caused by medical debt”. Even Bernie Sanders [2] doesn’t get it right, saying that “500,000 people go bankrupt every year because they cannot pay their outrageous medical bills.” 500,000 is a little over 60% of the 750,000 bankruptcies that happen every year, and his campaign said they were referencing this study. I think there’s a meaningful difference between losing income due to not working while you’re sick and not being able to pay your “insane medical bills”. Also, other studies have found much lower numbers, but I guess they aren’t as fun to quote. This is mentioned in the washington post article I linked: > “Based on our estimate of 4 percent of bankruptcy filings per year and the approximately 800,000 bankruptcy filings per year, our number would be much closer to something on the order of 30,000-50,000 bankruptcies caused by a hospitalization,” one of the co-authors of the NEJM study, economist Raymond Kluender of Harvard Business School, wrote in an email > “This would lead us to be skeptical of the 500,000 medical bankruptcies statistic, but that very much depends on how one defines a medical bankruptcy. … An enormous share of households have some amount of medical debt, so any survey of individuals will report a high share of them have medical debt but this does not imply that the debt caused them to file for bankruptcy.” Again, not saying any of this is fine, just that if we’re talking about solutions it’s probably wise to at least represent studies accurately. [0]: https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343%2809%2900404-5/pdf https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343%2809%2900404-5/pdf [1]: https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bankruptcy-statistics-4154729 https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bankruptcy-statistics-415... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/28/sanderss-flawed-statistic-medical-bankruptcies-year/?outputType=amp https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/28/sanderss-...
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    fair! > "Only for about 30% of bankruptcies did the debtor actually say medical bills were a reason for the bankruptcy." That would still be a lot! > "“Based on our estimate of 4 percent of bankruptcy filings per year" ...but 4% is a much smaller number than 30%. Is it actually more like 4%? I guess statistics aren't simple.... > "An enormous share of households have some amount of medical debt, so any survey of individuals will report a high share of them have medical debt but this does not imply that the debt caused them to file for bankruptcy I guess I'd be interested in the average medical debt numbers among those filing for bankruptcy vs the average medical debt numbers among those not filing for bankruptcy? To have a sense of what role medical debt may play? I feel safe in continuing to think that medical debt is a significant burden for many people in the USA (and therefore that "most people can afford that bill by going into debt" is a terrible solution), but that's a much more vague statement, i respect your point about being accurate with statistics.

jrochkind1 5y ago

> Just 39% of Americans could pay for a $1,000 emergency expense > * Fewer than 4 in 10 people have enough savings to pay for an unexpected $1,000 expense in cash. > * The rest would have to borrow, use a credit card or take out a personal loan. > * While the pandemic has set back emergency savings, many people are optimistic their finances will improve in 2021. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/just-39percent-of-americans-could-pay-for-a-1000-emergency-expense.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/just-39percent-of-americans-... But sure, many of those could take on debt to do it, as the summary says, true. Medical debt is a leading cause of bankruptcy in the US. (No, I'm not saying $1500 alone is going to cause a bankruptcy.)

anchpop 5y ago
The bankruptcy stat is that ~60% bankruptcies were contributed to by medical issues or debt. Here is the study it comes from: [0]. Many people misquote this as the bankruptcies having been caused by medical debt. For example, the 60% stat includes income loss due to illness (40% of bankruptcies involved this). Only for about 30% of bankruptcies did the debtor actually say medical bills were a reason for the bankruptcy. This is not to say the healthcare system in the US has no flaws. But it bothers me that a stat which found “loss of income due to illness” was more common among bankruptcies than medical bills greater than $5k or 10% of pretax income (~35%), constantly gets construed as “medical debt is responsible for 60% of bankruptcies” when debt doesn’t even appear to be the largest factor of medical-related bankruptcies. And this misconception is everywhere. This article [1] says “The same researchers' 2009 study claimed that 62.1% of all bankruptcies were caused by medical bills.” and was the top result on google when I searched “bankruptcies caused by medical debt”. Even Bernie Sanders [2] doesn’t get it right, saying that “500,000 people go bankrupt every year because they cannot pay their outrageous medical bills.” 500,000 is a little over 60% of the 750,000 bankruptcies that happen every year, and his campaign said they were referencing this study. I think there’s a meaningful difference between losing income due to not working while you’re sick and not being able to pay your “insane medical bills”. Also, other studies have found much lower numbers, but I guess they aren’t as fun to quote. This is mentioned in the washington post article I linked: > “Based on our estimate of 4 percent of bankruptcy filings per year and the approximately 800,000 bankruptcy filings per year, our number would be much closer to something on the order of 30,000-50,000 bankruptcies caused by a hospitalization,” one of the co-authors of the NEJM study, economist Raymond Kluender of Harvard Business School, wrote in an email > “This would lead us to be skeptical of the 500,000 medical bankruptcies statistic, but that very much depends on how one defines a medical bankruptcy. … An enormous share of households have some amount of medical debt, so any survey of individuals will report a high share of them have medical debt but this does not imply that the debt caused them to file for bankruptcy.” Again, not saying any of this is fine, just that if we’re talking about solutions it’s probably wise to at least represent studies accurately. [0]: https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343%2809%2900404-5/pdf https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343%2809%2900404-5/pdf [1]: https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bankruptcy-statistics-4154729 https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bankruptcy-statistics-415... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/28/sanderss-flawed-statistic-medical-bankruptcies-year/?outputType=amp https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/28/sanderss-...
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  fair! > "Only for about 30% of bankruptcies did the debtor actually say medical bills were a reason for the bankruptcy." That would still be a lot! > "“Based on our estimate of 4 percent of bankruptcy filings per year" ...but 4% is a much smaller number than 30%. Is it actually more like 4%? I guess statistics aren't simple.... > "An enormous share of households have some amount of medical debt, so any survey of individuals will report a high share of them have medical debt but this does not imply that the debt caused them to file for bankruptcy I guess I'd be interested in the average medical debt numbers among those filing for bankruptcy vs the average medical debt numbers among those not filing for bankruptcy? To have a sense of what role medical debt may play? I feel safe in continuing to think that medical debt is a significant burden for many people in the USA (and therefore that "most people can afford that bill by going into debt" is a terrible solution), but that's a much more vague statement, i respect your point about being accurate with statistics.